Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Deep-learning-based data-manipulation attack resilient supervisory backup protection of transmission lines

  • S.I. : Machine Learning Applications for Security
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cyber-attacks on smart-grid systems have become increasingly more complicated, and there is a need for taking detection and mitigation measures to combat their adverse effects on the smart-grid infrastructure. Wide area measurement system (WAMS) infrastructure comprising of phasor measurement units (PMUs) has recently shown remarkable progress in solving complex power system problems and avoiding blackouts. However, WAMS is vulnerable to cyber-attacks. This paper presents a novel cyber-attack resilient WAMS framework incorporating both attack detection and mitigation modules that ensure the resiliency of PMU data-based supervisory protection applications. It includes deep learning-based Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) model for real-time detection of anomalies in time-series PMU measurements and isolating the compromised PMUs followed by Generative Adversarial Imputation Nets (GAIN) for the reconstruction of the compromised PMU’s data. The corrected PDC data-stream is then forwarded to the decision-making end application, making it resilient against attacks. A Random Forrest classifier is used in the end application to distinguish fault events from other disturbances and supervise the third zone of distance relay for backup protection of transmission lines. The efficacy of the proposed framework for different attack scenarios has been verified on the WSCC 9-Bus System modeled on a developed real-time digital simulator (RTDS)-based integrated cyber-physical WAMS testbed. Experimental analysis shows that the proposed model successfully detects and mitigates attacks’ adverse effects on the end application.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Phadke AG, Bi T (2018) Phasor measurement units, WAMS, and their applications in protection and control of power systems. J Modern Power Syst Clean Energy 6(4):619–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Brahma S, Kavasseri R, Cao H, Chaudhuri N, Alexopoulos T, Cui Y (2016) Real-time identification of dynamic events in power systems using pmu data, and potential applications–models, promises, and challenges. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 32(1):294–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bernabeu EE, Thorp JS, Centeno V (2011) Methodology for a security/dependability adaptive protection scheme based on data mining. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 27(1):104–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tan J, Crossley P, McLaren P, Gale P, Hall I, Farrell J (2002) Application of a wide area backup protection expert system to prevent cascading outages. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 17(2):375–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Biswal M, Brahma SM, Cao H (2016) Supervisory protection and automated event diagnosis using pmu data. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 31(4):1855–1863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Seethalekshmi K, Singh SN, Srivastava SC (2012) A classification approach using support vector machines to prevent distance relay maloperation under power swing and voltage instability. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 27(3):1124–1133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jena MK, Samantaray SR, Panigrahi BK (2017) A new decentralized approach to wide-area back-up protection of transmission lines. IEEE Syst J 12(4):3161–3168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Das S, Panigrahi BK (2018) Real-time secured third zone relay operation under dynamic stressed conditions. IEEE Syst J 13(3):3337–3346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Samantaray S, Sharma A et al (2018) Enhancing performance of wide-area back-up protection scheme using pmu assisted dynamic state estimator. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 10(5):5066–5074

    Google Scholar 

  10. Khan R, McLaughlin K, Laverty JHD, David H, Sezer S (2018) Demonstrating cyber-physical attacks and defense for synchrophasor technology in smart grid, In: 2018 16th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST). IEEE, 2018, pp. 1–10

  11. Almas MS, Vanfretti L, Singh RS, Jonsdottir GM (2017) Vulnerability of synchrophasor-based WAMPAC applications’ to time synchronization spoofing. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 9(5):4601–4612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chawla A, Agrawal P, Singh A, Panigrahi BK, Paul K, Bhalja B (2020) Denial-of-service resilient frameworks for synchrophasor-based wide area monitoring systems. Computer 53(5):14–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Initiative NAS et al. (2015) Naspi 2014 survey of synchrophasor system networks-results and findings, North American SynchroPhasor Initiative (NASPI)

  14. Martin K, Brunello G, Adamiak M, Antonova G, Begovic M, Benmouyal G, Bui P, Falk H, Gharpure V, Goldstein A et al (2014) An overview of the IEEE standard C37.118.2—synchrophasor data transfer for power systems. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 5(4):1980–1984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Case DU (2016) Analysis of the cyber attack on the ukrainian power grid, Electricity Information Sharing and Analysis Center (E-ISAC), vol. 388

  16. Ashok A, Govindarasu M, Ajjarapu V (2016) Online detection of stealthy false data injection attacks in power system state estimation. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 9(3):1636–1646

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sridhar S, Govindarasu M (2014) Model-based attack detection and mitigation for automatic generation control. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 5(2):580–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. James J, Hou Y, Li VO (2018) Online false data injection attack detection with wavelet transform and deep neural networks. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 14(7):3271–3280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ghafouri M, Au M, Kassouf M, Debbabi M, Assi C, Yan J (2020) Detection and mitigation of cyber attacks on voltage stability monitoring of smart grids. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 11(6):5227–5238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chakhchoukh Y, Lei H, Johnson BK (2019) Diagnosis of outliers and cyber attacks in dynamic pmu-based power state estimation. IEEE Trans Power Syst 35(2):1188–1197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wang J, Shi D, Li Y, Chen J, Ding H, Duan X (2018) Distributed framework for detecting pmu data manipulation attacks with deep autoencoders. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 10(4):4401–4410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Pal S, Sikdar B, Chow JH (2017) Classification and detection of pmu data manipulation attacks using transmission line parameters. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 9(5):5057–5066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Musleh AS, Khalid HM, Muyeen S, Al-Durra A (2017) A prediction algorithm to enhance grid resilience toward cyber attacks in wamcs applications. IEEE Syst J 13(1):710–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Khalid HM, Peng JC-H (2016) A bayesian algorithm to enhance the resilience of WAMS applications against cyber attacks. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 7(4):2026–2037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Cameron C, Patsios C, Taylor PC, Pourmirza Z (2018) Using self-organizing architectures to mitigate the impacts of denial-of-service attacks on voltage control schemes. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 10(3):3010–3019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Siami-Namini S, Tavakoli N, Namin AS (2018) A comparison of ARIMA and LSTM in forecasting time series. In: 2018 17th IEEE international conference on machine learning and applications (ICMLA). IEEE, pp 1394–1401

  27. Wang G-G, Lu M, Dong Y-Q, Zhao X-J (2016) Self-adaptive extreme learning machine. Neural Comput Appl 27(2):291–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J (1997) Long short-term memory. Neural Comput 9(8):1735–1780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gers FA, Schmidhuber J, Cummins F (1999) Learning to forget: continual prediction with LSTM. In: Ninth international conference on artificial neural networks ICANN 99. pp 850–855

  30. García-Laencina PJ, Sancho-Gómez J-L, Figueiras-Vidal AR (2010) Pattern classification with missing data: a review. Neural Comput Appl 19(2):263–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Yoon J, Jordon J, Schaar M (2018) GAIN: missing data imputation using generative adversarial nets. In: International conference on machine learning, PMLR. pp 5689–5698

  32. Goodfellow IJ, Pouget-Abadie J, Mirza M, Xu B, Warde-Farley D, Ozair S, Courville A, Bengio Y (2014) Generative adversarial networks, arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.2661

  33. Horowitz SH, Phadke AG (2006) Third zone revisited. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 21(1):23–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Phadke AG, Thorp JS (2010) Communication needs for wide area measurement applications, In: 2010 5th International Conference on Critical Infrastructure (CRIS), 2010, pp. 1–7

  35. Wang G-G, Deb S, Cui Z (2019) Monarch butterfly optimization. Neural Comput Appl 31(7):1995–2014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Heidari AA, Mirjalili S, Faris H, Aljarah I, Mafarja M, Chen H (2019) Harris hawks optimization: algorithm and applications. Future Gen Comput Syst 97:849–872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Li J, Lei H, Alavi AH, Wang G-G (2020) Elephant herding optimization: variants, hybrids, and applications. Mathematics 8(9):1415

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding for this project was provided by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Department of Science and Technology, India, under project S3RACPPS (Research and development of Smart, Secure, Scalable, Resilient and Adaptive Cyber-Physical Power System) with grant number RP03609.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, 110016, India

    Astha Chawla & Bijaya Ketan Panigrahi

  2. Computer Science and Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, 110016, India

    Prakhar Agrawal & Kolin Paul

Authors
  1. Astha Chawla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prakhar Agrawal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bijaya Ketan Panigrahi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kolin Paul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Astha Chawla.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chawla, A., Agrawal, P., Panigrahi, B.K. et al. Deep-learning-based data-manipulation attack resilient supervisory backup protection of transmission lines. Neural Comput & Applic 35, 4835–4854 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-06106-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-06106-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation